Topica Email List Directory

Welcome Guest!

JO Forum

	Previous Message	All Messages	Next Message

RE: OpinionJournal Article: General Malaise	Mark Lewis
	Jan 29, 2004 03:05 PST

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C3E62C.F8B46FB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This isn't an attack on Peggy Noonan, who writes a lot of very good
stuff, except to say it's like a vegetarian giving advice on what cut of
meat to order. Did I not say she's probably got a lot of good points?
Didn't I? Only point with P. Noonan is that a vegetarian can learn
Prime Rib is the choice cut - the order I ought to like - but she's not
going to understand that sometimes you're just plain hungry for a
T-bone.

It is quite simple. I got a new job on the Minority Staff on the HASC.
Part of preparing for that job is a conscious effort to distance myself
from whatever politics I can wherever I can, because if I let myself get
worked up on political and/or partisan issues outside work, it will
carry over into work with negative consequences. And as LTC H will
remember, I wrote him a long note around just after the New Year how I
was working hard on taking longer view about the President, as part of a
good faith effort to retool the way I think (and to ease the heartburn).
My recusing myself from this narrow band of discussion it is purely a
self-preservation mechanism. Mental insulation, if you will, because I
know my strengths and weaknesses and I'm not good at compartmentalizing
this stuff. It's not a larger comment on the worthiness of the topic.
People who work in a candy factory don't eat a lot of chocolate.

One reasons I'm ending the forum is so that I don't feel obliged to
defend positions on the basis of the historical traffic. I can't adjust
them if I feel backed into a corner. This is the result of the very
thing you're talking about - using the forum as a way to learn and grow,
and why I wrote I now find it constricting in some places. That's my
baggage.

Higinbotham asked me what I thought of the article - my fault, I
shouldn't have engaged. That's another reason I'm ending the forum is
so I don't have to feel responsible to keep up with 100% of the content.
I can probably pinpoint an idea with about two search words in our
database of messages. I know them all. It's not that it's not
interesting - it's that it's been fascinating. But even I have finite
resources and I'm freeing some up until I know better the demands of the
new job - which by all reports will be taxing. And that's coming from a
guy who's been working and going to grad school at night. For one
thing, I'm not going to monitor traffic at work anymore. I switched to
the digest version on the NSRT.

But hey, you guys knock yourself out.

Mark

3 days.

-----Original Message-----
From: Connor-@aol.com [mailto:Connor-@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 10:56 PM
To: jofo-@topica.com
Subject: Re: JO Forum: OpinionJournal Article: General Malaise

Mark,

 In all fairness to LTC H. You have sent a number of articles that
paint the Bush administration in a rather unfavorable light. Maybe they
aren't political in the sense they aren't talking about his candidacy.
However, they still paint the administration as being somewhat
dishonest, possibly corrupt, and taking us in the wrong direction in the
WOT. There are slants outside of Op-Ed pieces. Personally, I get
something from everything I have read on the forum, and appreciate what
you have sent. We are all smart enought to understand the source, and
make our own informed opinions. I am quite sure all know Peggy Noonan
is conservative, and are aware her piece will be slanted that direction.
Her Op-Ed pointed out the full context of Clark's comments about rank,
which has relevance to a thread of our discussions. Additionally, it
pointed out other factual pieces of information about Clark.

 I guess the bottom line is that it is damn near impossible to send
anything "non-political", even when it is not Op-Ed, and deals strictly
with National Security. Who we choose as the next Commander in Chief
will have a major effect on National Security. Therefore, I would think
any factual info about the candidates would be important. I would agree
that articles like the piece on Kerry (clearly a smear job worthy of
National Enquirer) has no informative value. I also dislike the tabloid
crap that delves into a candidate's past for the "gotcha". However,
surely you can see some value in Noonan's piece.

 Just a few thoughts. Thought I'd piss you off before you ended
the forum on Saterday:)

Bill

To subscribe or read message archives, visit
http://www.topica.com/lists/joforum

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C3E62C.F8B46FB0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html>

<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">

<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10 (filtered)">

<style>

</style>

</head>

<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>

<div class=Section1>

This isn’t an
attack on Peggy Noonan, who writes a lot of very good stuff, except to say it’s
like a vegetarian giving advice on what cut of meat to order. Did I not
say she’s probably got a lot of good points? Didn’t I? Only
point with P. Noonan is that a vegetarian can learn Prime Rib is the choice cut
– the order I ought to like - but she’s not going to
understand that sometimes you’re just plain hungry for a T-bone.

 

It is quite simple. I got a new job
on the Minority Staff on the HASC. Part of preparing for that job is a
conscious effort to distance myself from whatever politics I can wherever I can,
because if I let myself get worked up on political and/or partisan issues
outside work, it will carry over into work with negative consequences. And
as LTC H will remember, I wrote him a long note around just after the New Year how
I was working hard on taking longer view about the President, as part of a good
faith effort to retool the way I think (and to ease the heartburn). My
recusing myself from this narrow band of discussion it is purely a self-preservation
mechanism. Mental insulation, if you will, because I know my strengths
and weaknesses and I’m not good at compartmentalizing this stuff.
It’s not a larger comment on the worthiness of the topic. People
who work in a candy factory don’t eat a lot of chocolate.

 

One reasons I’m ending the forum is
so that I don’t feel obliged to defend positions on the basis of the
historical traffic. I can’t adjust them if I feel backed into a
corner. This is the result of the very thing you’re talking about –
using the forum as a way to learn and grow, and why I wrote I now find it
constricting in some places. That’s my baggage.

 

Higinbotham asked me what I thought of the
article – my fault, I shouldn’t have engaged. That’s another
reason I’m ending the forum is so I don’t have to feel responsible to
keep up with 100% of the content. I can probably pinpoint an idea with
about two search words in our database of messages. I know them
all. It’s not that it’s not interesting – it’s
that it’s been fascinating. But even I have finite resources and I’m
freeing some up until I know better the demands of the new job – which by
all reports will be taxing. And that’s coming from a guy who’s
been working and going to grad school at night. For one thing, I’m
not going to monitor traffic at work anymore. I switched to the digest
version on the NSRT.

 

But hey, you guys knock yourself out.

 

Mark

3 days.

 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Connor-@aol.com
[mailto:Connor-@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday,
January 28, 2004 10:56 PM 
To: jofo-@topica.com 
Subject: Re: JO Forum:
OpinionJournal Article: General Malaise

 

Mark, 
 
 In all fairness to LTC H. You have
sent a number of articles that paint the Bush administration in a rather
unfavorable light. Maybe they aren't political in the sense they aren't
talking about his candidacy. However, they still paint the administration
as being somewhat dishonest, possibly corrupt, and taking us in the wrong
direction in the WOT. There are slants outside of Op-Ed pieces.
Personally, I get something from everything I have read on the forum, and
appreciate what you have sent. We are all smart enought to understand the
source, and make our own informed opinions. I am quite sure all know
Peggy Noonan is conservative, and are aware her piece will be slanted that
direction. Her Op-Ed pointed out the full context of Clark's comments
about rank, which has relevance to a thread of our discussions.
Additionally, it pointed out other factual pieces of information about
Clark. 
 
 I guess the bottom line is that it is damn
near impossible to send anything "non-political", even when it is not
Op-Ed, and deals strictly with National Security. Who we choose as the
next Commander in Chief will have a major effect on National Security.
Therefore, I would think any factual info about the candidates would be
important. I would agree that articles like the piece on Kerry (clearly a
smear job worthy of National Enquirer) has no informative value. I also
dislike the tabloid crap that delves into a candidate's past for the
"gotcha". However, surely you can see some value in Noonan's
piece. 
 
 Just a few thoughts. Thought I'd piss
you off before you ended the forum on Saterday:) 
 
Bill 

<pre>To subscribe or read message archives, visit <a
href="http://www.topica.com/lists/joforum">http://www.topica.com/lists/joforum</a></pre><pre>

</html>

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C3E62C.F8B46FB0--


	Previous Message	All Messages	Next Message

Concerned about privacy? Topica is TrustE certified.
See our Privacy Policy.